I hate the 360/430 looks, so I would never own one. Consider making love with a beautiful woman, would you wnat the one with the F1 transmission that gets the shift done in 10 milliseconds, or the one you and fondle the hardware while performing the work yourself. Faster is not always the right direction.
I think that was the OP's idea, too: He loves the looks of the 458 but wants a stick shift. From my perspective, that's easy to understand, as the 360 is not my favorite Ferrari in the looks department. I actually like the 430's aesthetics, but would rather have a 458. It's just prettier. Like the OP, however, I strongly prefer the six-speed manual transmission to the F1 paddles, faster shifts be d@mned. I still believe that transmission conversion kits for the 458 might come into existence if demand for them with manual trannies is high enough, and many people here on f-chat have indicated that they do prefer the stick. OTOH, it might be simpler to re-body a 360 or 430 that already has the stick with a 458 body. I don't know, though. ____________________ Spill-Chick well insure itch weird U right's spilled property.
How much slower are we talking about? In Ferrari's own literature, a manual 430 is .05 secs slower than paddles 0-400 meters. And that's with launch control unavailable in the US. That .05 involves 3 shifts, maybe 4. On a typical 1.5-2 mile track, you upshift 2-6 times. So maybe it costs a 10th of a second. Think the driver notices? Besides, it is much more ego gratifying to chase around and catch paddle cars with a manual on track days, something I did at Road America a couple of years ago. The typical 430 buyer would have been much faster if he saved the 12K extra for paddles and spent it on good racing schools. More fun too! Dave
Well, let's just stick to facts... If anyone were to take a 458 and re-engineer it to use a manual box, there is no way in the world it would be faster. This is just plain fact. So, my point is -- what's the POINT? Would putting a manual box in one just be so you can look cool? Because if you're so interested in "driving experience", you don't need a 458 to do that. You can make a 6 speed manual F430 faster than a standard 458 pretty easily. If you want a manual box and you want to go faster, just buy a manual F430 and upgrade it. Simple, easy, and you'll have a ton of fun. I'm not arguing that F1 driving is better than manual. I'm arguing that taking one car and making it slower just to do it is frankly --- silly -- when you can do it better and cheaper by simply upgrading another which already has the correct format for it.
All easily said for a man who has already chosen to jump to a 458 and perhaps finds himself compelled to wave the flag. I don't suspect anyone is suggesting that a manual would be faster than an F1, unless of course you're counting the down time when the F1 is getting it's clutch replaced or it's PIS reprogrammed while the manual is still tipping along nicely! If it's all about speed then arguably buying a 458 would be silly as there are in fact faster cars out there than the 458. I don't think giving the driver the level of satisfaction and involvement he wants is silly, in fact I feel it's damn silly of Ferrari to overlook the obvious desires of many owners loyal to the brand. In time, when prices come down to levels I could justify I would love to own a 458 but I'd much sooner own a manual one than an automated model when that time comes. Why? It's more involving, more satisfying, takes more effort and skill to get it right (and therein the satisfaction) and above all I don't need a system that falls over, breaks, wears out it's clutches faster, adds weight, cost, complexity and maintenance bills. But hey, that's just me. Vive la différence!
Point taken. I'm just tired of paddle afficiandos telling the world how much faster they are when it doesn't even amount to a rounding error and certainly not seat of the pants faster. Dave
I understand completely. But, this is about the idea of changing a 458 to manual, which I find rather bizarre. I feel the same way about the guy who converted his CS to a manual. IMO, he ruined it. You'd be better off taking a 360 6 speed coupe an upgrading it to CS format than ruin a rather special potentially collectible car (unless the factory did it of course).
I hate to beat this horse to death, but here's a YouTube video of the new 911 promo about the 7-spd manual tranny (naturally, the tone of the video pushes the PDK, but the choice is ultimately the customer's!)...: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eNAUihkOR0[/ame]
Engineering is a wonderfully intellectual pursuit, its absorbing, rewarding and fun. However the results from a huge organization trying to deliver a large complex project like a 458 are always products that will have had compromises made along the way. Many things can always be improved upon. Often thousands of them. Time pressures and money are often the key drivers but marketing messages can equally cause compromises too. The choice of robot gears is just one of a plethora of decisions that the team of product managers had to make when looking towards the design of the 458. Just like the choice of leather or the choice of carbon brakes. Decisions the original marketing teams, product managers and then engineers will have had to grapple with when targeting their audience whom will actually buy the cars new. Following on from all of this, ultimately cost, ability to make a profit, supply, time to market considerations, warranty claims and suppliers ability to deliver the quantities required for mass scale production all get added into the mix. What I am trying to describe is that it is just no so straightforward as the decision trees are so complex so not every decision will match everyone's ideas of their 'perfect' car beyond basic choices such as trim, color and bolt on options. In reality many decisions are not made purely in the pursuit of "outright performance" so suggesting that a manual 6 speed car shouldn't exist purely on this basis of shedding a few tenths doesn't make sense. Using this logic you could argue that they should not produce the 458 Spyder because it will be fractionally slower than the coupe. In actual fact, cunning engineers given the task can easily find a few 10th elsewhere anyway, reduced weight, improved software, etc. But so what? Different people want different things! Its all about the enjoyment, tactility, your senses, fun and getting what *you* want out of the product and how you use it. Roads, tracks, etc. Indeed many performance goals are in fact mutually exclusive to road car and marketing claims anyway. If you want ultimate performance "out of the box" your probably looking at the wrong car in the base 458 anyway unless you pony up and buy a heavily modified by Michelotto 458 GT3 and track it. The blend of luxury, comfort, styling, performance, engine music and status is what has ultimately become the defining characteristics of a "Ferrari". Outright performance is not the goal. The race cars are there for that and really they only exist as a Halo for the rest of the range. If your creative or engineering minded and you don't mind taking your idea's further then you can of course get the vast majority of what you wants done starting with the naked chassis as it left the factory. That's essentially what Jim Gluckenhaus has achieved with his creations. It does however require plenty of work, time and deep pockets. Some shun the idea (the purists) that anyone could do anything better than Ferrari themselves. This is actually amusing since the most serious performance oriented models are built and designed by Ferrari's technical partner, Michelotto. It is certainly not an easy task to enhance a Ferrari without factory backup and technical data but it is possible. You can indeed turn your base car into your dreams but then again this may well turn out to be a nightmare to someone else. Twin turbo'd 458, love or hate. If someone enjoys their Ferrari more because they fitted an aftermarket exhaust or a turbo why is that a crime? On originality/concours theme, these are not low volume cars any more. I also feel in this new mass produced world there will be plenty of pure, "undriven" examples of CS's, Scud's and beyond to keep the museum folk happy anyway so trying to enforce a belief that every car should be identical doesn't work for me.
I had to check to see if this thread was actually started on April 1st. Seems like such a bizarre thing to want to do the greatest car in the history of cars (in my unscientific poll of, well, me).
Maybe there are some people who think that it would be the greatest car in the history of cars. . . if only it had a gated shifter! Or maybe those people are fools. Or maybe it was a joke in the first place. ¿Quién sabe?
The emulator idea above wouldnt be that far fetched or hard to do. Most of the micro switches, shifter ect has already been worked out you would just need someone to figure out the processor to send/decipher the signals to the stock ecus. One of the companies that make high end racing simulators could probably figure it out since theyve already got the shifters, pedals, and micro switches done...... Just a thought.
This is an interesting thread for me as I'm waiting until I can purchase a California with a failed F1 transmission that I can then retro-fit a 6 speed to. I know the Cali was offered with a manual but so few were ever sold that finding one to buy has proved impossible for the 4 years I've been looking. I had hoped that the costs wouldn't be too astronomical given the Cali was designed to take a 6speed but the post right at the start of this thread about the F430 makes me think I'd better deepen my pockets for this project.
